prepare again the blasphometer

i gave it a new name! sounds more official than "blasphemy meter."

i begin today with a disclaimer: if you like sarah palin, stop reading. NOW. no, i mean it. because i'm going to explode.

given the fact that i have a lot of downtime at work, i tend to use it surfing the web more often than anything else. time goes faster that way, and i get in some good reading. i'm trying to stay abreast of political crap (because that's what it is, let's call everything by its right name here, people), and in general i end up miffed. but then there are moments that i end up enraged.

this is one of those moments.

nothing in particular has set me off this time, although a couple of discussions with a friend of mine have opened up my favorite can of worms. i may go to hell for despising someone so much, but i just can't help myself with her because she makes it so easy.

here are my reasons why i am not "afraid" of sarah palin (even if she has a big ol' gun):

1. kitschy only gets you so far. all this cutesy bullshit may have worked in her pageant days, but in the real world/realm of politics, it's annoying. her little phrases like "hopey changey" are nails down a chalkboard for me and for a lot of other people, too. i just can't take seriously someone who relies on this kind of phrasing to get a rise out of people. for the love of God, SPEAK INTELLIGENTLY. it's not difficult.

2. her boobs will eventually sag. (and yes, i know she'll get work done to lift 'em.) what do i mean by this? sarah palin is the "pretty face" of the Republican party. she's the spokesmodel, like whoever's hocking olay now, or covergirl or whatever. her job, whether she's realized it by now or not, is to get YOU excited for the Republican teabaggers. she's the GOP cheerleader, except she's replaced a megaphone with a lectern and cheers with notes written on her palm *headdesk*. she's disorganized and slightly ditzy. but she's cute and she has that darn wink that just makes her so gosh darn approachable, don'cha know? ugh. give me a break.

3. she's heartless. and i'm not afraid to say it. check her alaskan policies. check the facts on the wolf hunts. check and see what she's done to the wildlife population. 'dig, baby, dig' was only the tip of the iceberg on a mass wildlife destruction career that favors hunters over natives and ecosystems. while i'm not a tree-hugger by any means, i care about wildlife and about what the destruction of ecosystems means. the destruction of alaska's will reverberate down through the states and beyond. remember what happened in yellowstone? when wolves were hunted down to perilous amounts, herbivores like deer and rabbits and whatnot OVERCROWDED the park and destroyed acres of plant life vital to the area. when you hunt the natural predator of a herbivore or forager, that animal overpopulates and the result is disaster. that's why they had to reintroduce wolves into the area, and since, the park has been able to regenerate. erosion is down because plants are able to root into the soil. the overall place is healthier.

and i won't bother to address the brutality of the hunting processes. defenders of wildlife already did that.

but alaska will suffer from this sort of behavior. and if she gains power, so will the continental states. these practices are already extending into utah, and have extended into wyoming and idaho.

the point of this is that sarah palin is a two-sided coin and she flips herself according to her needs. one side is the effervescent Republican mouthpiece of the pro-life cause; the other is the brutal huntress who doesn't give a rat's ass about a non-human creature, especially the ones that get in the way of her trophies. the woman has no idea how predators even hunt. they go for the older, weaker and sick ones, not the big ol' bull you had your eyes on. that one would take way too much effort. *grumble*

4. she has set women back at least 100 years. there's a reason that most democratic women voted for obama after hilary clinton lost the nomination. basically, mccain put on a blindfold, spun around, and when he pointed at a human being with the appropriate anatomical parts, he said, "THAT'S GOING TO BE MY VP." that person was sarah palin.

and that was a joke. but in all seriousness, i know that he thought palin had some redeeming qualities. she's spunky, blah blah blah. and while that may be true, she's also PRETTY (see point #2). instead of choosing an articulate, strong, forceful woman who knows politics and policy, who reads and researches, doesn't rely on "folksiness" to get her way, and can debate her way out of a paper bag, he chose her.

most analysts will agree that there is a plethora of reasons why obamaden won the election. mccain's lack of knowledge concerning the budget, his age... but my finger still points toward palin. intentionally, not by accident or happenstance. i get this feeling that she never took the campaign that seriously. she never seemed prepared. she was annihilated during debates (i saw nothing redeeming in her whatsoever). she danced around questions and directed her answers toward something else entirely. "i know we're talking about this, but i want to talk about this." i'm sorry. deflecting does not work.

she doesn't take herself seriously, so why should i take her seriously? why should i view her as a threat? i, who wants to abolish political parties, who wants universal healthcare, who opposes nearly everything she stands for (i'm pro-life. i'll say it), and who refuses to put the veil over my eyes when it comes to her? why should i fear her when i see her as she is? i don't. i don't fear people who talk to hear themselves speak, who never have anything of value to say, and who constantly deride the people who are trying to make a difference in the country *i'm also sick of the word "change" now*, who rely on cheap slander and fear mongering to make their opinions into a valid points. why, when i am an educated southern woman who knows we lived in a screwed up society, why would i fear someone who has gotten by on her looks her entire life?! NO. I DO NOT FEAR PALIN. i have never feared palin! NO ONE should fear palin! she's a glorified cheerleader. that's ALL.

and, just as with mccain, if hell freezes and she enters the white house as president, i'm moving to europe. God only knows the havoc she'll bring.

frankly, my dear, i don't give a hoot.

and yet i'm blogging about it. go figure.

i love the fact that so few people read this, i can use it as a forum to vent about what i feel is wrong in the world. and i also find it remarkable that i haven't whined about sarah palin getting a show on fox. but i'm never going to see it (i hope), so i really don't care if the "right" wants to put yet another talking head on fox. because fox is only "fair and balanced" when it's about the right. so yeah.

not that i'm a huge fan of the left, either. i think my party of choice will be UP!

no. what i don't give a hoot about and yet feel compelled to write about anyway is the whole "people learning to live on less" thing. because i laugh hysterically (on the inside since i'm at work) when i read about people having to give up $5 lattes from starbucks or only buying one louis vuitton handbag instead of two. or, worse yet, having to shop at *gasp!* wal-mart! oh the HORROR!

i read an article, around the same time i read all those other articles from my last two posts, that rich people are having to teach their kids how to budget. and yes, i laughed. because for the rest of us folks, learning to budget is second only to learning the alphabet. whether or not we do well with it depends on us.

listen. my family made enough to provide for us and get us some of what we wanted. i learned early on the benefits of spend a little, save a lot. the only "label" i own is a coach purse that my boyfriend's parents bought me for graduation. i don't shop at places like aeropostale, abercrombe, or american eagle, not because i'm prejudiced against companies beginning with "A" but because i really don't see the point in buying a white t-shirt with the company's logo plastered across it when i could just buy a white t-shirt from walmart because, chances are, i needed a freaking white t-shirt. PLAIN. i've never understood the prep movement toward those clothes, and i never will. i shop at wal-mart (bought a really cute sweater there last week for $9!), target (sometimes), and if i'm feeling frisky, forever 21 or charlotte russe, having learned many moons ago that i don't ever have $2000 lying around for me to just throw away on stuff. i have loans, credit card payments, rent, utilities, and gas and food to pay for. screw your $3000 louis vuitton handbags and $1500 t-shirts. i don't need your whole foods obsession, $5 crappy lattes, or sports cars. i'll stick to my maurices, charlotte russe, and forever 21. i'll continue buying my food at kroger or wal-mart, and i'll keep driving my chevy malibu. why? because i don't need it. would i like it? maybe some of it. i'd give any part of my body for an aston martin. but i don't need it.

people need to learn the difference between 'want' and 'need.'

materialism, i'm not finished with you

i've realized that materialism takes many forms. yes, we, as a society, depend on "coveting thy neighbor's goods" to sustain our economy. but "goods" doesn't just refer to your best friend's shirt, or your sibling's sweet new ride, or even to your neighbor's house. thanks to plastic surgery, you can covet your neighbor's gooooods (i.e., nose, face, boobs, butt) and get that too, only tighter, firmer, smaller, or bigger, depending. i'm taking the opportunity to pick on spencer's better half, heidi, because A) it's easy, B) it's cathartic, and C) she's in the news.

after what i just read (i'm such a loser), i must add D) it's sad.

now, my four loyal readers, i'm not going to turn this into a gossip rag. i'm not going to waste your time (or mine--i have a synopsis to write!) on senseless celebrity drabble because most days, i can't care less who's doing what or whom and when. i'm using heidi as an example of the epidemic that is sweeping girls across our great nation, and across the world. the perception of feminine beauty as thought up by an overweight, balding, old guy. the perception we cling to. that women have to be skinny and super tall, while maintaining big boobs and big bootays.

many, many, many, many moons ago, a famous painter named peter paul reubens painted voluptuous, curvy women like these:

The Three Graces

he painted Venus (the looooooooove goddess) as a curvy blonde. back in his day, which was the 1600s i know, it wasn't a crime to have some meat on dem bones. it was frowned upon to be a skinny, waifish, little thing because that meant you were A) poor or B) diseased. women like the graces were esteemed as beautiful. there are fertility goddess statues of women with large breasts and large bellies. and it was OKAY. it was the STANDARD.

the difference between those cultures and today's culture is that they didn't covet immortality. we do.

we want eternal youth. we women don't just desire growing old wrinkle-free, we DEMAND it! hell hath no fury like a woman scorned by her crows feet and laugh lines! God forbid we tell our stories on our faces. God forbid we look like we've lived.

i can't be the only one disconcerted by what i see on TV and in magazine ads. women who are stick straight with huge boobs, airbrushed to perfection in print; women 40, 50, 60 years old afraid that one wrinkle will transform them into old crones when women who allow themselves to age are so beautiful (and don't freak me out in olay commercials). my grandmother lived to be in her 70s. she didn't have a wrinkle on her because she took care of herself. okay, she had the crows feet, but that was about it. she didn't care if she got them. i loved and admired that, especially in a culture that thinks wrinkles are like cancer. worse, really.

so where does heidi fit? *honestly, i almost forgot i'd mentioned her. i have to try to reign this bad boy in*

heidi falls into the materialistic category that houses plastic surgery. coveting your neighbor's ass, and i don't mean donkey, folks.

there's so much that bothers me about this girl. she's only 23 (i'm 24), and yet she's had at least THIRTEEN surgeries. thirteen. nose, lips, boobs, entire face. and she wants more. it's sad. it's sad that we can't be comfortable in our own skin. and it's even worse that people profit off our insecurities, but of course, people will profit off anything these days. here's a girl, who was actually pretty before, now looking like a trampy barbie doll. honestly. there are lots of things i'd like to change about myself, too, but i'm not going to. because i want to be okay with what i have. i love what my body could be should it lose about 20 pounds (to be in that healthy range). i'm happy with my face. i don't want to think that the only way i can be beautiful is to have some person who doesn't care about me deconstruct my entire body and rebuild it as some plastic mess. i don't want that. i want to explain to my kids, especially if i have girls, that i developed an awesome personality through my ugly faze, and now i'm happy with who i am. what's the point of looking like everyone else?

no one can be happy as-is anymore.

and what chills me is that this girl thinks God's okay with her. um, NO. i dye my hair because i like the colors better. i admit it. but that's as far as i go. she's tucked and enlarged and removed the things that make her who she is, and if she thinks that the "real me" is some inflated, sanded down, superficial surgery-addict, then that's pathetic, and i can guarantee that that is NOT what God created her to be.

see, these bodies don't last, no matter how we try to preserve them. and when heidi dies and decomposes, all that'll remain of her will be silicone.

what kind of legacy are we leaving for our children? we're teaching our sons that girls like heidi are what to look for (forget personalities. those are so pasé), and we're teaching our daughters that you must look like this to be accepted. it's wrong. it's immoral. and it's unfair.

but, again, these are the people we want to be like. go figure.

only more materialism can make it right!

"So hopes for a vigorous rebound rest on spendthrift consumers being as materialistic as ever."

taken from an article i found via yahoo talking about the four things that could cause a potential re-collapse of our economy.

i have to ask: isn't materialism what got us into this mess in the first place? people buying what they can't afford for little more than showing off? (not the term i want to use, but it's 3:17 in the morning and my brain is sliiiightly shot...)

my mom and i had a great conversation today, and during said discussion arose the topic of higher depression rates among teens and young adults. after my "duh" moment, i found quite a bit of truth to the article i read, which correlated the higher percentages with the materialistic views of our society. "getting rich" is one of the top reasons kids strive toward higher education (obviously, they haven't thought about the thousands of dollars that they'll have to pay back in loans that will suck them dry [i'm not bitter]), and dammit, doesn't spencer 'the brat' pratt (i totally just made that up!) make being rich look sooooo appealing?

i never wanted to be rich, per se. i want to be marketable. but i want to raise my future children to live within their means and not be spoiled brats who got everything they ever wanted. there are people who've worked hard for what they have, but there are more who have lied, cheated and stolen to get where they are now. they've milked some insane event (jon and kate, i'm looking at you) for every fifteen minutes of fame they could get, and then some. some of them are downright undeserving of it because they don't know how to handle it.

as pat summit, the incredibly sage-like coach for the UT Vols women's team, asked after lane kiffin ran for the hills (beverly, that is), "how much money do you need to live?" granted, ms. summit isn't exactly begging for change, but she has a point. what does it take?

where has loyalty gone? where have legitimate hard work and sacrifice gone? why can people like the pratts, jon and kate, and countless others be picked out of the obscurity the rest of us live in and be counted as elite, whether you like them or not? WHY?!

and why do we want to be like them?

because of the materialism that, sadly, sustains our economy.

we have no values anymore...